使地方化的影响

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Osiris Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1086/725131
A. Csiszar
{"title":"使地方化的影响","authors":"A. Csiszar","doi":"10.1086/725131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the Cold War bibliometrics took on a privileged role in the discourse of global scientific development. This essay locates a key condition of possibility for this development in the consolidation of the “international scientific literature” at the turn of the twentieth century through international bureaucratic projects that were fueled by European imperial anxieties. When citation analysis emerged in this political context in the 1960s and 1970s, it was commitments to largely qualitative criteria—regarding open communication, universality, and standards of peer review—that sustained their legitimacy. The conditions of possibility for what has now come to be seen as a form of epistemic injustice by algorithm has as much to do with craft as code. Attending to this historical genealogy is crucial if we wish to better understand the nature of more recent forms of algorithm discrimination.","PeriodicalId":54659,"journal":{"name":"Osiris","volume":"38 1","pages":"103 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Provincializing Impact\",\"authors\":\"A. Csiszar\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the Cold War bibliometrics took on a privileged role in the discourse of global scientific development. This essay locates a key condition of possibility for this development in the consolidation of the “international scientific literature” at the turn of the twentieth century through international bureaucratic projects that were fueled by European imperial anxieties. When citation analysis emerged in this political context in the 1960s and 1970s, it was commitments to largely qualitative criteria—regarding open communication, universality, and standards of peer review—that sustained their legitimacy. The conditions of possibility for what has now come to be seen as a form of epistemic injustice by algorithm has as much to do with craft as code. Attending to this historical genealogy is crucial if we wish to better understand the nature of more recent forms of algorithm discrimination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Osiris\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"103 - 126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Osiris\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725131\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osiris","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725131","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在冷战期间,文献计量学在全球科学发展的讨论中发挥了特殊作用。本文定位了这种发展的一个关键条件,即在20世纪之交,通过欧洲帝国焦虑引发的国际官僚项目,巩固“国际科学文献”。当引用分析在20世纪60年代和70年代出现在这种政治背景下时,正是对主要定性标准的承诺——关于公开交流、普遍性和同行评审标准——维持了它们的合法性。现在被算法视为一种认识不公的可能性条件与技巧和代码有很大关系。如果我们想更好地理解最近形式的算法歧视的本质,那么关注这一历史谱系是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Provincializing Impact
During the Cold War bibliometrics took on a privileged role in the discourse of global scientific development. This essay locates a key condition of possibility for this development in the consolidation of the “international scientific literature” at the turn of the twentieth century through international bureaucratic projects that were fueled by European imperial anxieties. When citation analysis emerged in this political context in the 1960s and 1970s, it was commitments to largely qualitative criteria—regarding open communication, universality, and standards of peer review—that sustained their legitimacy. The conditions of possibility for what has now come to be seen as a form of epistemic injustice by algorithm has as much to do with craft as code. Attending to this historical genealogy is crucial if we wish to better understand the nature of more recent forms of algorithm discrimination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Osiris
Osiris 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Founded in 1936 by George Sarton, and relaunched by the History of Science Society in 1985, Osiris is an annual thematic journal that highlights research on significant themes in the history of science. Recent volumes have included Scientific Masculinities, History of Science and the Emotions, and Data Histories.
期刊最新文献
Front and Back Matter Notes on the Contributors Acknowledgments Statecraft by Algorithms Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1